Brussels, 18/12/2012 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 18 December, the European Parliament took a big step towards seeking an agreement on reform of common agricultural policy (CAP). This covered: a green CAP in the first pillar (direct aid), options on internal convergence (rebalancing of aid between farmers in one and the same country), modest external convergence (redistribution of aid between countries), complementary payment per hectare (ha) and measures for managing crises. The Parliament endorsed fewer than 100 compromise amendments on four legislative texts (direct payments, rural development, market measures and horizontal regulations). Those amendments will be put to the agriculture committee's vote end January.
Paolo De Castro (S&D, Italy), who chairs the Parliament's agriculture committee, said on Tuesday during a press conference that the agriculture committee had managed to reach fewer than 100 compromise amendments on the four legislative proposals relating to CAP reform, despite the fact that 8,000 amendments had been put forward by the various MEPs. De Castro said the Parliament's agriculture committee had a proposal to make. It will be put to the translators and, on 23 and 24 January, he said, the committee will vote on all compromise amendments. The final vote on the four issues will be linked to the results of talks on the multiannual financial framework for 2014-2020. De Castro felt the vote on greening would be positive as it is one of the key elements of reform, something that has not yet been acquired. A large majority during the committee vote on the compromise amendments will, said the agriculture committee chairman, allow them to go on to plenary in March to call for a negotiating brief and begin trialogue with the Council mid-March of next year.
Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D, Portugal), who is rapporteur on direct aid and rural development, said that the agreement between himself and the shadow rapporteurs of the political groups makes it possible to have a majority on the more important aspects of reform.
Direct payments.
On the notion of active farming, a negative list of surface areas not likely to obtain direct payments is foreseen. That list would not be final but completed by the member states. In order to receive subsidies, farmers should have a farming activity but the definition is up to the member state.
On the subject of flexibility between the first (direct aid and market spending) and second (rural development) pillars, the amendments authorise countries to transfer 15% from the first to the second pillar and 10% between the second and first.
On the subject of convergence between farmers within member states (internal convergence), three options have been taken on board: 1) that of the Commission (full convergence until 2020 in each State or region); 2) that of Capoulas Santos (a softer solution with variations in order to achieve convergence); and 3) that consisting of applying the same method as suggested for convergence between member states (external convergence).
On external convergence, the rapporteur's solution was adopted. It is foreseen that the member states which, in terms of per hectare payment, are below the Community average should converge on the average and not on 90% of the average as suggested by the Commission. Santos said this is moderate convergence. He would have liked more but it is a little more than what the European Commission is proposing.
Regarding greening, Santos went on to say he felt they had a good compromise, improving the Commission's proposals. Thirty percent of the national envelope of direct payments should be allocated to greening measures (as the Commission suggests). The three greening measures proposed by the Commission have been taken on board, with some changes. Santos asserted that they are increasing what greening is by definition by including agro-environmental measures and the Natura 2000 network.
On the diversification of crops, the compromise provides that, below 10 ha of arable surface area, farmers are exempt from diversification. Between 10 and 30 ha, farmers should grow two crops, and, when farmers have over 30 ha, three crops. Farms with crops under water, or permanent grassland covering 75% of the surface area, are exempt from having to establish areas of ecological interest. Also, the Commission is tasked with defining the legal framework allowing member states to proceed to the ecological certification of farms. Areas of ecological interest will apply to farms of over 10 ha in size. Also, the percentage allocated to each farm should be gradual (e.g.: 3% between the first two years, 5% during the next three years, and 7% during the last years of the period).
Young farmers will be entitled to 2% of the national envelope. They will be entitled to a 25% increase in per hectare payments within a 100 ha limit in all countries (and not in line with the average size of the farm as the Commission suggested). The amounts not used should be transferred to the national reserve and above all allocated to new farmers (exceptional support for helping new young farmers to set up business).
Small farmers. The system will be voluntary, but simplified. All those who receive under €1,500 will be automatically included in the new scheme. Farmers may leave the scheme if they so wish. The limit of the amounts has been increased from €1,000 to €1,500.
Complementary payment per hectare. This is a new measure that aims to allow countries to increase the first hectares of a farm up to 50 ha by attributing to them a percentage of the increase to be defined by each member state, up to 30% of the national envelope.
Rural development. This will include: - a new chapter on women farmers; - a preferential mechanism for young farmers (measures for facilitating access to land); - importance granted to rural tourism and to small farms; - a five-year extension for reforestation measures; - support for the creation of producer groupings; - 25% of funding to be devoted to agro-environmental measures and to ecological farming; - for areas with natural disadvantages, a proposal for a regulation from the Commission to be made by end 2014 in order to define these regions depending on biophysical criteria; - and incentives for the creation of mutual funds for risk and crisis management and a jointly financed system of insurance and income stabilisation (as advocated by the Commission).
Common market organisation. Michel Dantin (EPP, France), rapporteur, spoke of the 20 compromise amendments in this area: - safeguarding of the CAP budget for crisis management; - more decentralised and more flexible mechanisms (more coordinated at international level) for ensuring producer income; - the safety net reasoning (which encompasses the use of market tools such as public intervention or aid to private storage) will be completed by crisis management measures; - better framing of Commission action so that operators may determine in advance what will happen on the markets (predictability of public action); - strengthening of production sector power within the food supply chain (by promoting its degree of concentration which remains very low compared with the upstream and downstream sectors); - the need to clarify the matter of applying competition law to agriculture in order to avoid differences of interpretation; - extension until 2020 of the sugar quotas; - no majority within the Parliament for re-establishing or extending the milk production quota regime (but the imbalance that can affect the market after the end of the quotas warrants the setting in place of a support system based on production development during crisis periods; - and for wine, it is desirable that vine planting rights should be maintained. (LC/transl.jl)